Navigating the Sea of Christian Worldview Literature

By Dr. Tim L. Anderson, Professor of Theology

The relatively recent emphasis within evangelicalism on possessing and defending the Christian worldview has spawned an ocean-sized body of literature in the past three decades.  All one has to do is to type in “Christian Worldview” on Amazon.com to see this in less than a second. Those seeking to find their way in order to grasp and grapple with this concept discover it to be a daunting task, not only to keep up with the growing number of sources, but to discern their orientation, accuracy and profitability.  This article is not intended to be an exhaustive study, but a concise resource to help readers navigate the burgeoning sea of literature. It begins with initial works, and continues with philosophically, scientifically and culturally oriented writings.

Initial Works

Worldview studies from an evangelical Christian perspective have been in existence for quite some time now. To trace the history of this concept is beyond the scope of this survey, but interested individuals should consult David K. Naugle’s Worldview: The History of a Concept (Eerdmans, 2002). He develops the philosophical history and analysis of the concept of worldview, mostly in Western scholarship. There are several books that can be termed initial studies. These sources often focus on the definition and general parameters of studying worldviews. It can prove helpful to identify some of the initial works and those that have followed.

James Sire’s The Universe Next Door: A Basic Worldview Catalogue (IVP, 4th ed., 2004), first published in 1976, has been the standard introduction to the study of worldviews.  His seven questions for understanding any worldview are still relevant. The famed philosopher Nicholas Woltersdorff wrote of this on the back cover to the 1988 edition, “If you are looking for an introductory exposition of prominent world views, I know of no better book.”

It is interesting to note that when I was perusing the theology holdings at the University of Regensberg’s library (Germany) two years ago, I was excited to find a copy of this book in English. Sire has since written Naming the Elephant: Worldview as a Concept (IVP, 2004) as follow up to The Universe Next Door, wherein he has added four important revisions to his earlier work. He has rightly recognized that a worldview is not just a set of basic concepts, but also a fundamental orientation of the heart. The deepest root of a worldview is its commitment to and understanding of the “really real.” It is also determined by considering behavior. Worldviews are grasped as story, not just abstract propositions.

Norman L. Geisler has been one of the most prolific and influential evangelical authors in this subject area. His famous Christian Apologetics (Baker, 1976) focuses on the development of tests for truth for and within various worldviews. Later he published Perspectives: Understanding and Evaluating Today’s World Views (Here’s Life Publishers, 1984) with William Watkins, which was revised and expanded into Worlds Apart: A Handbook on World Views (Baker, 1989, 2nd Edition, 2003). Geisler’s summary and critique of seven major world views is clearly organized around their understandings of ten universal elements: God, world, God/world relation, miracles, man’s nature and man’s destiny, origin of evil, end of evil, basis of ethics, nature of ethics, and history and its goal.

Another initial work is Understanding the Times: The Collision of Today’s Competing Worldviews, (Revised 2nd Edition, Summit Press, 2006) by David A. Noebel, former president of Summit Ministries. This is the basis of Summit’s curriculum. It describes and evaluates worldviews of Christianity, Islam, Secular Humanism, Marxism-Leninism, Cosmic Humanism, and Postmodernism. It is quite extensive. The worldviews are evaluated for their theology, philosophy, ethics, biology, psychology, sociology, law, politics, economics and history.

For many, one of the most significant worldview books today is Nancy R. Pearcey’s Total Truth: Liberating Christianity from Its Cultural Captivity (Crossway, 2004, 2005 Study Guide Edition).  She adopts the framework of Creation, Fall and Redemption as the basis not only of the biblical/Christian worldview, but also the story behind all worldviews. Pearcey acknowledges Albert M. Wolters’ Creation Regained: Biblical Basics for a Reformational Worldview (Eerdmans, 1985) as an influence for her use of Creation, Fall and Redemption as the structural categories behind her understanding of worldview and her critiques of competing worldviews. Also profoundly influenced by Francis Schaeffer, she stresses the need to understand Western epistemology by incisively showing how most of western civilization has bought into a fact/value dichotomy that robs us of the ability to have objective truth outside of the realm of science. The more popular treatment of the concepts Pearcey develops in Total Truth can be found in How Now Shall We Live? (Tyndale House, 1999) co-authored with Charles Colson. The implications of assessing worldviews, and showing how the Christian worldview is the only one that can be consistently lived out, is worth the price of this book.

Another worldview standard initial text is Gary W. Philips and William E. Brown’s Making Sense of Your World: A Biblical Worldview (Sheffield, 1991, 1996).  This helpful overview of the elements of a biblical worldview includes case studies and discussion questions at the end of each chapter. The principles of this work are emphasized at Cedarville University, where Brown is currently president. The book needs updating to address the fact that worldviews are not just a series of beliefs that have expression in culture, but are part of an assumed story. Also, the three classifications of worldviews—Material/Naturalism, Spiritual/Transcendentalism, A Personal God/Theism—are a bit artificial.  The examples given either overlap considerably or do not fit neatly in their categories. More specific examples would improve the argument.  However, the text is still very practical, with sections on implications for the family, the church and the world.

Mark J. Bertrand’s more recent work, (Re)Thinking Worldview: Learning to Think, Live, and Speak in This World (Crossway, 2007), provides a fresh, unique and yet readable approach to worldviews.  He develops his four pillars of a worldview while retaining the Creation, Fall and Redemption themes of biblical theology, but then stresses the regaining of wisdom as an important biblical and practical mandate. He encourages his readers to engage culture in helpful ways.

Another example of an initial work in worldview literature is Michael W. Goheen and Craig G. Bartholomew’s Living at the Crossroads: An Introduction to Christian Worldview (Baker Academic, 2008). These authors have succeeded in laying the conceptual foundation of the elements of the Christian worldview as the biblical story and fundamental Scriptural beliefs.  They also bridge the gap by contextualizing the biblical foundation in light of Western culture and postmodernity. It is practical, calling believers to a relevant witness and impact on society.

Finally, one of the best of the most recent initial works is Douglas Huffman’s contributions and editing of essays in Christian Contours: How a Biblical Worldview Shapes the Mind and Heart (Kregel, 2011). The book provides a good overview of the benefits of previous evangelical studies on foundational definitional and practical issues of worldviews.  Huffman’s emphasis on the Christian’s personal responsibility to develop and share the biblical worldview is clearly one of its strengths. Since Huffman is a Biola University professor, it is not surprising that the tone/argumentation of the book is philosophically oriented. The arguments are strong, though some of the concepts and terminology may be unfamiliar to some readers. However, as an initial work, it is extremely valuable in its interaction with contemporary thought forms, which for today’s “cultured despisers” are often philosophical in nature.

It should be apparent at this point that evangelical works on worldview, even these initial ones, vary considerably. They contain similar principles, but are framed differently based upon the growth and refinement of worldview as a concept.  Worldviews are not only sets of beliefs, assumed and unconscious, that determine how one will view themselves and everything around them. Worldviews are also stories that explain the elements of reality and the historical process in which all of humanity participates. The Bible’s storyline of Creation, Fall and Redemption is one of the most helpful ways to grasp the Christian worldview and, moreover, to compare and contrast it with others. It is at this point that the Christian can clearly bring the gospel to bear on any worldview.

Philosophically Oriented

The philosophical approach to worldview is crucial. There is a profound need for Christians to articulate their own worldviews with clarity and nuance. The principles and overall framework of the following works and others like them must be part of the thinking Christian’s worldview and interaction with others. Philosophy has always addressed the broader worldview questions, and yet the principles of metaphysics, epistemology and ethics have not typically been made available to a Christian audience beyond the scholar, seminarian or philosophy major. However, Christian philosophers are now helping to articulate the comprehensive, consistent and coherent nature of the Christian worldview.

The older work of  L. Russ Bush, A Handbook for Christian Philosophy (Zondervan, 1991), is still a very helpful introduction to Christian philosophy, in particular because it takes the time to address the concept of worldview up front. It is accessible to the novice, and contains one of the more helpful glossaries.

Ronald H. Nash’s significant evangelical introduction to philosophy, Life’s Ultimate Questions: An Introduction to Philosophy (Zondervan, 1999), not only has excellent chapters on histories of philosophers and important problems in philosophy, but also features chapters on the significance of understanding worldview thinking. Nash’s philosophical approach is obvious in his Worldviews in Conflict: Choosing Christianity in a World of Ideas (Zondervan, 1992). He develops the Christian way of viewing God, self, and the world, and tests the perspectives of other worldviews in light of these. It is a clear, accessible and helpful volume.

The most extensive philosophical resource in this area is J.P. Moreland and William Lane Craig’s Philosophical Foundations for a Christian Worldview (IVP, 2003). This weighty, comprehensive introduction to the Christian worldview has been written from their expertise as the two of the most preeminent Christian philosophers today. It is especially valuable for upper division and masters level university students.

Philosophy and the Christian Worldview: Analysis, Assessment and Development, edited by Mark D. Linville and David Werther in the Continuum Studies in Philosophy of Religion, is a collection of essays dealing with philosophical issues related to the elements of the Christian worldview.  It challenges secular and pluralist arguments and assumptions. The drawback of this serious volume is most of the essays are beyond the reach of many lay Christians who do not have background in philosophy.

The labors of the philosophy of religion have helped the church to have a rational response to some of the most profound religious questions in the history of mankind. One needs only to recall how atheists have framed the problem of evil and suffering to deny the existence of God in order to appreciate the need for Christian philosophical worldview.

Scientifically Oriented

Another approach is to view worldview studies in light of insights from disciplines apart from the humanities, such as anthropology and psychology. One helpful example of the anthropological viewpoint is found in Paul G. Hiebert’s Transforming Worldviews: An Anthropological Understanding of How People Change (Baker Academic, 2008). This monumental work, by the renowned missiologist who taught at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School, is a must read for anyone wanting to grasp the multifaceted nature of worldviews around the globe. He shows the intricate nature of a worldview, and that it is a serious mistake to fail to recognize not only its principles, but its expressions as well.

Charles Kraft’s Worldview for Christian Witness (William Carey Library, 2008) is a unique approach in the anthropological vein, a 608-page resource for those seeking to not only understand but also instigate change in worldviews cross-culturally. His emphasis on spiritual power as necessary for change is important. However, as a proponent of the signs and wonders movement, his over-extension of supernatural power as a connecting point between the Christian and other worldviews can distract from the heart of the gospel, and reduce it to a power encounter.

After years of teaching a class at Harvard on the subject, psychologist Armand M. Nicholi wrote the very insightful and creative The Question of God: C. S. Lewis and Sigmund Freud Debate God, Love, Sex, and the Meaning of Life (The Free Press, 2002). He evaluates the spiritual and naturalist worldviews through Lewis and Freud respectively. These truly significant men discuss many of the same worldview topics, and so engage the reader both in the philosophical debates and their lived experiences. A 3-hour and 45-minute DVD produced in 2004 offers another presentation of these perspectives, including docudramas and a lively discussion group led by Nicholi himself. It is very helpful and well done.

Scientific approaches are valuable in that they offer the fruits of descriptive observation. Anthropology and psychology contribute much to our understanding of human behavior on multiple levels. They also help demonstrate the depth and breadth of a worldview beyond the conceptual. The practice of a worldview is manifested in personal practices and—of equal importance—cultural structures. The Christian seeking to make inroads into another worldview must practice patient research and prayer. However, the ultimate value of scientific approaches must come in the theological assessment of beliefs, behaviors, motivations, and practices.  Cultural relativism, for example, is an inadequate response to the cultural diversity described for us in the behavioral sciences.

Culturally Oriented

Culturally oriented worldview studies have emerged as a significant portion of the literature.  Amazon’s search key for this approach is “Christian Worldview Integration.”  One of the earlier accomplishments is R.C. Sproul’s Lifeviews (Revel, 1986).  Sproul provides an accessible and practical worldview resource showing how major philosophies that flow from secularism affect the way Americans think and act.  His ultimate purpose is found in the cover’s subtitle, “Make a Christian impact on culture and society.”  The approach to culture-oriented worldview books centers not only on understanding culture, but also impacting it for Christ.

A helpful recent work that emphasizes Western culture is Steve Wilkens and Mark L. Sanford’s Hidden Worldviews: Eight Cultural Stories That Shape Our Lives (IVP, 2009). The authors discuss individualism, consumerism, nationalism, moral relativism, scientific naturalism, the New Age, postmodern tribalism, and salvation by therapy.  The book stresses the importance of developing the Christian worldview, while also presenting a Christian apologetic designed to counteract these non-Christian thought structures.

For many, the driving force behind the call to impact one’s culture is the Reformed “Cultural Mandate.”  Jonathan Morrow, in Think Christianly: Looking at the Intersection of Faith and Culture (Zondervan, 2011), assumes this mandate when he states, “But what many of us don’t often think about is the fact that before Jesus ever spoke those words (Matt. 28:19-20), or even needed to become incarnate to redeem us and entrust us with this global calling, we already had a Great Commission. This mandate is rooted in God’s original intent for humanity and was given before we fell into sinful rebellion against our creator.” He then cites Genesis 1:27-28 and italicizes, “Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it.”  He adds, “Notice the social and natural dimensions of this statement.” (44).

Similarly, Nancy Pearcey acknowledges the influence of Dutch Calvinist Abraham Kuyper behind her belief that all of creation needs to be placed under the Lordship of Christ, including all aspects of society. On Genesis 1:27-28, she states, “This passage is sometimes called the Cultural Mandate because it tells us that our original purpose was to create cultures, build civilizations—nothing less” (Total Truth, 47). She adds that when we obey it, “we participate in the work of God Himself, as agents of His common grace” (49), because “God Himself is engaged not only in the work of salvation (special grace) but also in the work of preserving and developing His creation (common grace)” (48-49).

There is much to commend the Christian fulfillment of the Cultural Mandate, for without it one cannot advance the Lordship of Christ and the glory of God in the world. However, it should not be the ultimate focus, apart from fulfilling the Great Commission centered on evangelism and discipleship. Without the reconciliation of fallen humanity to their Creator, the creation with its cultures cannot be transformed to advance God’s kingdom and reflect His glory.

Evangelical cultural-oriented Christian worldview works find their apex in the Christian Worldview Integration Series edited by J.P. Moreland and Francis Beckwith. The integration of biblical truth to form the Christian worldview is the focus of all of this series. Garrett J. DeWeese, in his volume Doing Philosophy as a Christian (IVP Academic, 2011), argues that there are two types of integration: personal and conceptual.  Both are necessary for developing and living out a comprehensive, coherent and consistent Christian worldview. Furthermore, because the Bible is true when rightly interpreted, the Christian cannot help but be committed to integration. At the same time, Christian discipleship affects the holistic nature of our character and as well as our vocation (10-12).

The works in this series address a broad spectrum of conceptual and cultural/vocational themes: Education for Human Flourishing: A Christian Perspective (2009) by Paul D. Spears and Steven R. Loomis; Psychology in the Spirit: Contours of a Transformational Psychology (2010) by John Coe and Todd W. Hall; Politics for Christians: Statecraft as Soulcraft (2010) by Francis Beckwith; Authentic Communication: Christian Speech Engaging Culture (2010) by Tim Muehlhoff and Todd V. Lewis; Business for the Common Good: A Christian Vision for the Marketplace (2011) by Kenman L. Wong and Scott B. Rae; and Christianity and Literature: Philosophical Foundations and Critical Practice (2011) by David Lyle Jeffrey and Gregory Maillet. A main draw back to these volumes is the stress on influencing the academy. The scholarly tone is quite significant. However, this series offers a helpful example of what reflective Christians should be doing in all areas of life.

Conclusion

The relatively recent wave of emphasis within evangelicalism on possessing and defending the Christian worldview is obviously a good thing. Hopefully, this body of work is inspiring believers to grapple conceptually and personally with their own worldviews, and to evaluate how accurately and completely they match up with the truth of Scripture.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | 2 Comments

The Theological Turn in Youth Ministry

By Andrew Root and Kenda Creasy Dean, InterVarsity Press, 2011

Reviewed by Dr. Sam Baker, Associate Professor of Student and Family Ministries

Here’s a simple challenge. This coming Sunday carefully and cautiously approach the youth pastor in your church and ask, “What is your theology of ministry?” If he stares at you like you’re from the former planet known as Pluto, don’t be surprised. Unfortunately, it’s the response of most youth pastors today. If, however, you’re met with a well-crafted, carefully articulated response, one which makes sense both in theological and practical terms, consider yourself lucky.

As Kenda Creasy Dean, co-author of The Theological Turn in Youth Ministry notes, the turn in youth ministry is “…an era in which theological reflection is becoming the norm in youth ministry instead of the exception… it [youth ministry] has not always been concerned with theological reflection. This is not to say that theology wasn’t happening, or that youth workers didn’t care about theology. But it is to say that youth workers’ actions and self-conceptions were rarely informed by significant theological reflection.” Theological reflection is “becoming the norm?” This undoubtedly is a positive marker in the progress of youth ministry, isn’t it? It’s a rhetorical question.

Although The Theological Turn… reflects a different faith tradition than Corban follows, it still offers valuable points for consideration. It is divided into two parts, with Part I, “Theological Starting Points,” addressing the question, “What does theology have to do with youth ministry?” This section invites the reader to envision “practical” theology (over-and-against systematic or historical theology) as an integrative imperative for youth ministry practice. In this respect the authors emphasize the roles that experience, reflection, and action play in the outworking of youth ministry programs. They challenge academics and practitioners alike, “… that by seeing youth ministry as a theological task, theory and practice are held together. It is too often assumed that youth ministry is for doers and not for thinkers. Yet good doing demands good thinking.”

As the authors discuss what is required for “good thinking” to take place, they exhort youth ministers to return to a reformed “representative” theological tradition, pointing students to a shared experience of suffering—suffering common to all humanity—ultimately redeemed through Christ’s sacrifice on the cross. This representative perspective, according to the authors, provides a way to hold a correct theology of humanity’s need and Christ’s atoning work together, connecting Jesus’ identity as a shared representative with His work of redemption. The authors note, “Youth intuit that salvation lies in finding someone who loves them enough to die for them, and the whole of adolescence is directed toward this end.”  Thus, the theological starting point for the turn in youth ministry begins with practical theology, which will begin to slide the center of youth ministry thought toward a historical and deeply traditional Christian understanding of shared suffering.

The second half of Part I offers suggestions as to how to initiate this kind of theological thinking. The language, however, can tend to be heavy with academic and theological jargon (e.g., historical dogmatics, kerygma, Bultmann’s existentialism, via negative hermeneutics) unfamiliar to many youth workers. It may even be overwhelming. And while the authors “raise the bar” by motivating youth ministers to think theologically, my concern with this section has more to do with wording which may not speak to all Christian faith traditions. The specific historical theological language advocated by the authors may detract from the importance of the message, and its implications for broad theological contexts of youth ministry.

Part II, “Theology Enacted,” focuses on the pragmatic side of youth ministry, providing methodological examples built on theoretical concepts addressed in Part I. This is the more easily digestible section of the book, as both authors demonstrate how theological considerations can be integrated into specific ministry contexts.

Topics include:

  • A biblical understanding of the miraculous: how the miraculous works within the meaning of suffering.
  • Sin v. sinning: how to talk with students about the doctrine of sin.
  • A theological perspective on adolescent hormones, desire, and sexuality.
  • An eschatological way of viewing camps, retreats, and conferences.
  • Outdoor trips: experiencing God and facing the crisis of reality.
  • Service and mission trips: global tourism, or seeking the suffering vagabond?
  • A catechetical model for confirmation: a suggested curriculum.
  • Merging eschatology and hope into the here-and-now.

Each of these chapters provides rich dialogue, mixed with practical implications for specific ministry programs. The authors draw on current hot topics within youth ministry, providing exactly the kind of integrative approach encouraged throughout the rest of book. The authors do an exceptional job demonstrating the rich theological thinking required and necessary for contemporary youth ministry.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Comments Off on The Theological Turn in Youth Ministry

Cross-Cultural Connections

By Duane Elmer, IVP Academic, 2002

Reviewed by Dr. Annette R. Harrison, Assistant Professor of Intercultural Studies

A book about connections implies differences, and the word “cross-cultural” in the title creates the impression that this book applies only to individuals traveling to other countries. That is not the case, however, nor is this a “missionaries only” book.

Cross-Cultural Connections discusses diversity in individuals from both sexes, multiple generations, and varied ethnic and national backgrounds, with  many examples relevant to business people and other professionals. From different generations of family members, to husbands and wives, to rural versus urban Americans, author Duane Elmer suggests that we all need help to connect across our differences. The book is written for committed and engaged Christians, and emphasizes the importance of good cross-cultural adjustment to represent Christ well wherever we are, whatever we do.

Elmer distills complex and difficult concepts into a highly readable and practical book that explains what it takes to successfully interact and engage in meaningful relationships with people who are not like us. The first broad message for the reader is that diversity is not bad; different does not mean “evil” or “inferior.” The second message is that it is possible to navigate differences in perspective, and, though the process may be uncomfortable or disconcerting at times, it results in highly rewarding benefits in understanding, friendship, and successfully modeling Christ’s acceptance and love. The third message is that those who have gone before can help; an important section of Elmer’s book describes known areas of clashes in perspective, including time, logic, individualism, task-orientation, categorical thinking, status and behavioral control.

The tone of Cross-Cultural Connections is personable, sincere and non-threatening. When Elmer discusses negative or immature responses or behavior in cross-cultural (or other) situations, he speaks from his own personal experience and asks the readers what they can relate to. In this way, he graciously circumvents a number of sticky issues that may get weighted down by defensiveness or emotion, such as judgments and evaluations, cultural relativity, and Scriptural interpretation.

Different is not wrong, Elmer states; we meet difference in all of our relationships. It is how we react to and negotiate points of difference that is important. While Elmer is careful to emphasize that God has clearly communicated what is right and what is wrong, he leads the reader to consider a number of areas where choices of communication or behavior do not violate God’s commands; they are simply different than our own.

It is necessary that the reader agree with Elmer’s assessment before continuing in the book, as this theme occurs again and again. Moreover, it is the basis upon which Elmer builds in order to recommend that those new to a culture suspend judgment until they understand what they are truly seeing – is it something that is wrong, or is it simply different? The importance of this distinction rests with our human tendency to negatively assess whomever or whatever is different than we are. Negative assessments lead to judgmental thoughts, criticisms, resentments, frustrations and anger. Those who desire to be fruitful in a new culture cannot afford to start down the slippery slope of negative thoughts. If we are to truly communicate Christ, Elmer emphasizes, we must be able to remain accepting and open until we understand, discern and are given godly wisdom for helpful action, rather than action that will either be misinterpreted or do harm.

Further, it is possible to cope with, and even enjoy, differences. And how we react to differences directly affects our experience of a new culture, as well as how well we represent Christ. Slight adjustments are a small price to pay for the privilege of representing Christ well. Elmer provides examples such as learning greetings, trying food, or wearing local clothing. The positives outweigh the negatives in making these small, exterior changes. On the other hand, tremendous goodwill and openness to relationships with people from the host culture is the reward. This, in turn, enhances the experience, and makes us effective representatives of Christ.

Elmer’s presentation may be criticized for being overly simplistic and repetitious. The themes of “different is not wrong” and “good relationships make the best witness” occur repeatedly. On the other hand, returning to essential themes creates a cohesive presentation. The discussion questions and opportunities for reflection at the end of each chapter may be used by anyone, even those without a particular culture or country in mind, though readers with a specific destination in mind will receive the most benefit from them.

I highly recommend this book to anyone considering travel to another area of the world, whether for short-term mission work, as an exchange student, to represent a company, or to be a guest speaker. However, as mentioned earlier, anyone dealing with difficulties in relationship caused by differences in perspective will benefit from the generous, insightful presentation. Elmer’s exposition clearly shows us that even within our own culture, we cannot take shared perspectives for granted. It takes intentional thought and practice to nourish and sustain connections, cross-cultural or otherwise.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | Comments Off on Cross-Cultural Connections

Communicating for a Change

By Andy Stanley and Lane Jones, Random House, 2006

Reviewed by Dr. Dan Garland, Adjunct Professor of Ministry

Communicating for a Change, by Andy Stanley and Lane Jones, brims with practical insights into effective communication that any minister or Bible teacher will find helpful. However, other aspects of the book call for sober evaluation.

Related to effective communication, the authors emphasize having a clear goal that can be expressed in single statement. Everything should lead up to, support, or point back to that central, memorable statement of truth.  Asking the five questions—what do listeners need to know, why do they need to know it, what do they need to do, why do they need to do it, and what can I do to make it memorable—has proven a useful technique when I get bogged down or distracted while preparing to communicate the single point of a passage.

Other good counsel includes internalizing the message by identifying the big chunks of the sermon that serve as “mile markers” through the message; building tension in the introduction and early part of a message that is relieved by the one point of God’s Word being presented; less information, more life; talking faster, and taking it slower in the turns so that “passengers” aren’t lost in transitions.

In my opinion, Chapters 12 and 13 are the most helpful. “Me-we-God-you-we” is an approach to organizing a message based on the relationship between the speaker and the audience, rather than the text. It starts with the speaker’s personal experience with a problem/question/need as a way to introduce the subject and invite people to identify with it. Next, the audience and the speaker engage together (we) in the process of discovering what the Bible (God) says to answer the question/solve the problem/ relieve the tension identified in the me-we portions. The listener (you) is then faced with the changes called for by the single point of the sermon. The message concludes with a challenge to imagine or envision the implications of an obedient response on the part of the community of believers–including the speaker and listener (we).

While commending these principles of communication, however, I found four areas that need closer analysis. First, the writers “make no distinction between preaching, teaching, or general communication.” But, while all forms of communication share common qualities, biblical preaching and teaching are unique. General communication serves the speaker and his audience. Faithful preaching serves God, proclaiming His Word (2 Tim. 4:1-5). Biblical preachers speak with divine authority that no one naturally receives (1 Cor. 2:14).

Second, the authors’ assertion that the purpose of preaching is to change lives is only partly true. Preachers proclaim Christ (Col. 1:28), not just ideas from the Bible that they judge to be essential, applicable, or appropriate, “all they gotta know,” in the authors’ words, to modify people’s behavior. God has already communicated what He considers to be essential to knowing Him (John 17:3, 6-8, 17).  Also, teaching the Bible equips listeners with a model for how to grow spiritually, and to evaluate the messages they hear (Acts 17:11).

Third, the assertion that “burden plus passion equals change” fails to distinguish the divine power of biblical content from the human power of its packaging and delivery (1 Cor. 1:18-25; 2:1-5). When preachers talk about a “powerful illustration,” an “impactful delivery,” or “seven keys to irresistible communication,” often they are describing a human cause-and-effect. Of course preachers should use appropriate persuasive techniques, but they must never depend on them to convict sinners, justify believers, and sanctify saints, which only God can do. The authors may be correct in stating that, “presentation trumps information when it comes to engaging the audience,” but only the Word itself is “…living and active and sharper than any two-edged sword…” (Heb. 4:12-13).

Finally, the assumption that a generational shift has made it necessary to “abandon a style, an approach, a system that was designed in another era for a culture that no longerexists,” is unsubstantiated. The question, “Will you consider letting go of your alliterations and acrostics and three point outlines and talk to people in terms they understand?” attacks a caricature of textual expository preaching as a relic of left-brained modernity. This implies either that the old style of preaching was ineffective in its own generations, or that now we have to accommodate a new generation that is not only completely different, but justifiably disconnected from believers who went before them. This goes beyond the idea that truth never changes, but methods can and should. It confuses contemporary practice with relevance.

The wise reader will benefit from this book’s many helpful insights and techniques for effective communication, but will do well to carefully consider its perspectives related to expository preaching.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | Comments Off on Communicating for a Change

Connecting and Reflecting

By Dr. Greg Trull, Dean of Ministries, Professor of Biblical Studies

This is a special issue of DEDICATED. We celebrate 35 years of teaching ministry by Dr. Bob Wright. Bob created the missions program at Corban that has sent hundreds to make a difference in the world for Christ. He also has mentored many of Corban’s current faculty.

I know my life and ministry have been deeply impacted by Bob. For my 21 years here, I have had the joy of working across the hall from a legend who is also my friend. This issue conveys our love for Bob and his love for world ministry. We’re reflecting back through a timeless article he wrote in his first year at Western, and through a moving tribute by his son, Jon. We’re also looking at connecting to the needy world around us.

The photos above show Bob in his adventurous days in the Amazon (Jon’s article describes them in detail), and more recently in the classroom here at Corban. Even though he is wearing two ammunition belts, he is not to be confused with the Shooting Salvationist mentioned below!

Karen Pease, one of Bob’s former students, considers missionaries and theological training. Her experience teaching in China made her realize that connecting requires not only an understanding of the culture, but also an intimate grasp of the Gospel and Scripture.

Lee Ann Zanon, our wonderful editor, reviews What is the Mission of the Church? The book addresses the missional trend in ministry today, including issues such as church involvement in social justice issues. You will enjoy the rich biblical assessment and encouragement of authors Kevin DeYoung and Greg Gilbert.

Dr. Kent Kersey reviews The Shooting Salvationist, the fascinating story of the infamous murder trial of J. Frank Morris, leader of the fundamentalist movement of the 1920’s. This work, written by a pastor, explores the historical and cultural surroundings of one of the most polarizing figures in the early fundamentalist movement.

I hope you enjoy the solid encouragement in this issue and join us in celebrating decades of faithful ministry by Bob Wright. Words cannot capture and only eternity will tell how many lives he has impacted!

Copyright © 2012 Corban University School of Ministry. Originally published in Corban’s e-journal, Dedicated. As long as you include this copyright credit line (and hyperlinks), you may reprint this article in its entirety.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Comments Off on Connecting and Reflecting

A Life of Inspiration and Impact—Now and For Eternity

By Jonathan Wright, missionary with World in Need–serving in Austria and the Middle East; son of Dr. Robert and Rita Wright

I do not remember our first meeting, but that encounter with Dr. Robert Wright was the most significant date of my life. He and my mother have impacted my life more than anyone else I have ever met, not simply because they are my parents, but because of who they are, what they believe, and how they have invested their lives in me, my brothers, the kingdom of God, and everyone they have encountered.

My father would introduce me to multiple cultures and subcultures in Brazil, Peru, Colombia, Asia, and Europe. These experiences would forever shape who I am—how I live my life and how I am able to impact people from all over the globe. And, I cannot speak of my dad without including my mom, Rita. She has walked each step of the journey with him, in ministry and life.

When you meet a hero, you rarely realize it until later in life. As I look back, I see that I have been tremendously privileged – beyond words. I look forward to how God will continue to teach me through my parents in the future.

How It All Began

Robert Wright was born in Brockton, Massachusetts. When he was ten years old, the family moved to another part of the state, Hyannis, on Cape Cod.  While living there, Robert came to faith in Jesus Christ during his senior year in high school. That commitment grew deeply, and led him to attend Providence-Barrington Bible College (merged with Gordon College), where he met Rita. Their commitment to serve Christ as missionaries was firmly established during the years of study at Barrington. They married in 1955. Shortly after graduation, they left for Brazil to serve among the indigenous population.

Robert and Rita, along with me—their nine month old son, boarded a ship in New York City harbor in the spring of 1957, and eventually docked in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. The journey continued across Brazil and they began ministry with the South America Indian Mission in the interior state of Mato Grosso. Their initial ministry was in the city of Aquidauana, where they learned Portuguese and ministered among the Terena Indians and their churches.

Life for the next ten years would rotate between responsibilities outside of Cuiaba and Aquidauana.  Those years were full of great learning and fruitful ministry as they served among the Bacari, Terena and Chavante tribal peoples, and Robert taught at the Aquidauana Bible Institute at Chacara Agua Zul.

During that time, the work specific to the Bacari people did not seem to produce a lot of visible results, but Robert and Rita persevered. Life was very remote, with transportation by horseback and ox carts. Mail service was once a month, from a Missionary Aviation Fellowship (MAF) pilot. Robert’s anthropological and ethnographic skills were honed on the front line working with many differing people groups. The following accounts reveal his sensitivity and evaluation of indigenization and adaptation to the cultures. For example:

  • He observed the people did not take responsibility for the local church building. It had been built by the mission before his arrival.  The mission built the building with the hope that people would then attend the services in the building, hear about Jesus and put their faith in Him. This did not readily occur nor did the indigenous people they feel a need to maintain the building. In discussions with the Indians he learned they would not maintain the building because they said the missionaries built it so they could take care of it. It was their building. He wrote to the mission, asking for permission to tear the building down and have a ministry based in the people’s homes. The mission did not respond readily thus he took this to be a yes and tore the building down. Eventually a letter came denying permission to tear the building down but it was too late!
  • He also noted that all songs used in the services were imported. In discussions with the Indians, he learned that they did not write their own songs because he played the accordion. Since they did not play that instrument, they didn’t think they could have their own songs. One night on his way home, Dad “accidently” dropped his accordion in the river. Now the people would write their own songs.
  • The custom had been for the missionaries to live outside the tribal village on their own mission stations. Dad saw this separation as a hindrance to advancing the Gospel. He believed missionaries should live among the people, so he secured permission from the Brazilian government to build a home in the village.
  • These sensitivities led to greater fruitfulness.

Risk and Adventure

Robert and Rita did not shy away from adventure and risk in their missions work. For example, the Chavante Indians had been known as the “head crushers of Brazil.” Anyone who ventured into their territory would often be killed. One year, some of the Chavante came out of the jungle because they were dying of small pox. Mom and Dad, along with another missionary family, had great opportunity and influence in seeing many of these people come to Christ.

As part of their culture, the tribe had formerly practiced an interesting custom of gathering every night before going to sleep and dancing to appease the evil spirits. After they came to Christ, they asked if they could still dance, but now dance to Christ, ending the night in prayer. The missionaries thought that was a great idea, and it continues to this day.

Robert and Rita had a great burden for the unreached tribal groups which still existed in Brazil at the time. This passion would lead them to risk their lives in order to make contact with and “pacify” these groups so they could be reached with the Gospel. Robert made one such trip lasting 6 weeks to contact the Xicao people. The venture did not lead to an opening but many important lessons were learned and commitment to the work deepened.

During these years, there were reports of a tribal group attacking and killing people as they travelled on the roads or settled in a particular region of Mato Grosso. Robert and Rita, along with another missionary family, prayed about the situation and felt God had led the husbands to venture into the forest with some local Indians and try to make contact with this tribe so they could eventually hear the Gospel and come to Christ.  They were gone for 4 weeks searching for them deep in the forest. Eventually contact was made with what were the Galleira Indians.  In time a missionary family was sent to work among the people.

In 1967, Robert and Rita joined the Association of Baptists for World Evangelism (ABWE) and moved to northern Brazil. Their ministry began near the borders of Brazil, Colombia and Peru, in the village of Santa Rita, Amazonas, focusing on the Ticuna Indians. It did not take long for previous lessons learned in Brazil to be applied in this new region. For example:

  • They always worked to learn the language of the tribal people.
  • They observed that the Indians were basically indentured servants to the land owners. The land owners gave permission for the Indians to farm on their land, but the products were sold to the landowners, and the Indians then had to buy supplies from the land owners’ stores. Robert felt compelled to help purchase land on which the Indians could establish their own village. Thus began the village of Campo Alegre.
  • Robert and Rita felt it was important to live among the Ticunas, and they built a home in Campo Alegre.
  • During the years in this region they also did medical work, often treating dozens of individuals each afternoon. People would come with all kinds of illnesses, snake bites, or injuries. Robert and Rita would do their best to care for them.
  • During the years at Campo Alegre, Robert focused on training Ticuna church leaders so that by the time the Wrights left in 1977, the work was completely cared for by the Ticunas themselves!  Today the Ticunas have their own mission society reaching tribal people in Brazil.

While living in this region, Robert heard about the Mayoruna Indians. Their lands were being infringed upon by outsiders looking for resources, resulting in increased conflict and death. He and another missionary ventured into the jungle to locate the individuals involved and attempt to make peaceful contact. The tribe was located, but no peaceful contact was able to be established during his time in Brazil.

A New Chapter Begins

In 1977, the Wrights were invited to serve as Missionary in Residence at Western Baptist College, now known as Corban University. Robert and Rita accepted the one year assignment, which has lasted thirty five years! Soon after they arrived, Rita became college registrar, and served in this capacity for over thirty three years. 

During this phase of ministry, through his teaching and godly life, my dad imparted wisdom, skills, insights, and a passion for global missions to hundreds of students, many of whom have served and are still serving around the world. During the years at Corban, he maintained his high involvement in overseas missions by making many trips to China and Romania to teach and encourage local church members and leaders.  In Romania, he was deeply involved during the closing years of the Communist era—encouraging the churches, training students, and instilling his fervor for missions. Once Communism fell, he frequently taught at the Bible school in Selimbar.

During his years at Corban, Robert also pursued further education, earning a master’s degree and eventually completing his PhD at age sixty five! In the more than forty years he has lived in America, he has continually been used by God to help churches here better understand global missions, and deepen their involvements.

A Son’s Tribute

To me, Dr. Robert Wright is my dad and father.  Together, my parents have impacted me more than anyone else (except my wife).  They have deeply affected the course of my life for the good and for this, I thank them.

I have learned many vital lessons from my dad about what truly matters. These include:

  • Godliness. I noticed this in my dad, even as a young child. I always remember seeing him having his devotions and prayer time as I grew up.
    • Character. Who you are is more important than what you accomplish.
    • Ministry. Reaching people with the life changing message of the Gospel and helping them live for Jesus has eternal consequences.
      • The Bible and doctrine. What you believe will affect how you life.
      • People. Do what you can to help those you can. Every cultural group is worthy of respect and you need to listen to and serve with and under the nationals.
      • Family. Spend time with those closest to you because they are important. His love and care for my mother were evident. Even though ministry is a busy life, he found time to spend time with us four boys. He would take us on fishing trips on the Amazon and in the lakes in the jungle; he and mom would visit us at boarding school; he would take us boys water skiing on the Amazon when we were home and on furloughs we would take time to show us some of America. When I was in the tenth grade we were on furlough and that year I worked part time at a marina. While there I saw this hydroplane boat which I really wanted. I always remember that my dad was willing to take it to Brazil for me. I can still see it strapped to the top of our old station wagon as we drove from New Jersey to Florida and he shipped it to Brazil.  I am sure that was a real effort of sacrifice!
      • Hard work. He showed us that working hard is important, and he modeled that to us.

In addition, Dad greatly influenced and taught me much of what I know regarding missions. From him, I learned about anthropology, ethnography, cross-cultural ministry, theology, and being true to the Bible. He also shaped my understanding of how to apply biblical truths—in an uncompromising and sensitive manner—to the various cultural challenges.

What I learned from my dad helped equip me for my life’s work—serving as a missionary pastor in an international church with people from over thirty five countries, teaching the Bible at the United Nations Center to people from many differing spiritual backgrounds and countries, ministering in Romania during and after the fall of Communism, and working with Christians and Muslims in the Middle East.

As I grew up, Dad let me travel with him. I gained many valuable insights by observing how he did his work. In 1981, we traveled in China together and got acquainted with the church. In 1984, he encouraged me to go to Romania. We served there together for many years.

Summary

In summary, my dad has taught me to be: 1) A lifelong student of people, God, academics and life. 2) Independent, always following God’s call, even if it is hard. 3) An entrepreneur, finding a way to advance the Gospel even if it means operating “outside the box.” 4) A risk taker, understanding that giving one’s life for the advance of the Gospel is worthwhile, not letting fear of failure hold me back.

I am confident that many of you reading this article could echo these and other truths Dr. Robert Wright has taught you. The song, “Find Us Faithful,” portrays the legacy he and my mother have left to me, my brothers and our families, and to all of us who have been impacted by their lives. May we be faithful to follow their example.

We’re pilgrims on the journey of the narrow road
And those who’ve gone before us line the way
Cheering on the faithful, encouraging the weary
Their lives a stirring testament to God’s sustaining grace

Surrounded by so great a cloud of witnesses
Let us run the race not only for the prize
But as those who’ve gone before us
Let us leave to those behind us
The heritage of faithfulness
Passed on through godly lives

After all our hopes and dreams have come and gone
And our children sift through all we’ve left behind
May the clues that they discover
And the memories they uncover
Become the light that leads them
To the road we each must find

Chorus:
Oh may all who come behind us find us faithful
May the fire of our devotion light their way
May the footprints that we leave
Lead them to believe, and the lives we live inspire them to obey
Oh may all who come behind us find us faithful[1]

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Missionary Strategy and the American Church

By Dr. Robert Wright, Ph.D., Professor of Intercultural Studies/Missions

Editor’s Note: This article first appeared in the Western Commentator in 1978, while Dr. Wright was missionary in resident at Western Baptist College (now Corban University). We present it in this issue of DEDICATED in honor of his upcoming retirement. Its principles still hold true, and offer valuable insights for contemporary ministry.

Can the American church learn anything from foreign missionaries? Or has missionary strategy developed from observing the American church? Both may be true. For several years now, however, missionary strategists (and that is what all missionaries should be) have been learning and applying various principles and methods from which the American church can learn.

One of the most spectacular, which has spread across the world, began in 1966. Ralph Winter, a missionary to Guatemala, began a pilot project which is well known today as Theological Education by Extension (TEE). The practicality and value of such a program is evidenced by the many extension programs now being offered by seminaries in America, especially for continuing education of missionaries and pastors. The American church is learning from foreign missions!

Another important area of study, in which hundreds of missionaries are involved, is church growth. What causes churches to grow or not to grow? All fundamental missionaries assume God’s sovereignty and the convicting work of the Holy Spirit. No attempt is made to supplant what only God can do! However, as we understand people and circumstances, we are able to more effectively communicate the Word. As missionary strategy becomes more refined, there is a greater understanding of the dynamics which aid in church planting and church growth.

When we were assigned to the ministry amongst the Ticuna Indians in Brazil in 1968, our task was to plant churches. Thus a church planting strategy had to be developed. The planting of the church in 1970 and its subsequent growth—from eleven members to 480 six years later—presented an awesome responsibility. Since the work had begun before our appearance on the scene, we had some questions which only statistical research could answer.

Was the church truly growing by conversions, or only by the many who had previously made decisions for Christ? Also what were the factors which caused the growth? A research project was begun and much was learned. The study revealed that more than 35 percent of current members had been led to Christ since the church was organized. This meant a decadal growth rate of 90 percent by conversion! We discovered many principles which could be reproduced in other areas of the tribe, and also in our own United States.

Universal Principles

Principles which contribute to the growth of churches are universal. They are applicable in any nation and among any people. Methods may have to change, but the principles remain the same. We will attempt to discover together some of these principles as illustrated by the Apostles in the Book of Acts. Missionaries world-wide are discovering, discussing and applying many of these to produce growing New Testament churches.

The first local church was planted in Jerusalem with a nucleus of 120 disciples. The apostles were obviously a part of this church and had a significant part in its planting and development. The multiplication of satellite churches was immediate, with the addition of 3,000 souls (Acts 2:41). The various groups met in numerous house churches, beginning a movement which spread throughout the Roman world.

From Jerusalem, the planting of churches spread throughout Judea, then to Samaria and most significant of all, Antioch. The persecution of the Hellenist Christians resulted in the spread the Gospel and the believers “who had been scattered went everywhere preaching the Word” (Acts 8:4). This “gossiping” of the Gospel by laymen spread to Antioch and, no doubt, further. Their witness planted a church in Antioch (11:19-26) with which the Jerusalem church, as well as the Apostles, began to have an active part (11:22).

The willingness on the part of the Jerusalem church to sacrifice some of its good leadership, such as Barnabas, to aid the developing church and to minister to a receptive audience, is significant (11:22-26). The importance of this principle in church planting today cannot be over-emphasized. Such a spirit should characterize churches in the United States by the encouragement of gifted individuals to consider foreign missionary service. Also pastors must be willing to sacrifice competent leadership to begin other churches in this country.

The transfer of missionary outreach from Jerusalem to Antioch is obvious from the historical record (Acts 13). Here, a missionary church becomes a sending church. The local church produced the workers, for Paul and Barnabas were actively involved in service to this church. They were “ministering to the Lord,” and the local church provided opportunity for them to demonstrate their spiritual gifts. As their abilities were recognized, the Holy Spirit spoke to the local church of God’s call to them. They were sent out by the Holy Spirit and “released” (apoluo) by the church for the ministry of church planting throughout Asia. The church continued to expand and extend itself—to go and to grow!

Church Growth

It is interesting and important to note that Luke gives much attention to the quantitative growth of the church in Acts. The fact that he notes specific numbers of church members—120, 3,000, 5,000, multitudes and myriads (Acts 1:15; 2:41; 4:4; 6:1; 9:31; 21:20) is significant. He must have been excited about the expansion of the church as he recorded the conversion of individuals (18:26-39), households (16:15, 34; 18:8), and entire villages (9:35). Many lessons and church growth principles can be learned from these examples in Acts.

People Groups and Families

Church growth often results from web and/or people movements. These are movements to Christ through webs of family or class relationships where many individuals come to Christ in conjunction with and because of relations or friends. In Acts whole households were won and, at least in one recorded instance, (16:32; see also 18:8) the individual was challenged to believe along with his family unit. One can surmise that this did not stop with the conversion of the jailer and his immediate family, but spread throughout the extended family. Multiple families must have believed on the occasion of Peter’s preaching in the home of Cornelius also.

Acts 8:6 gives evidence of multi-individual, mutually interdependent conversions. The people must have discussed not only the Gospel message, but also its implications for themselves and “multitudes with one accord” believed it. The transformation of a community occurred when “all who lived at Lydda and Sharon saw him, and they turned to the Lord” (9:35). Households were natural bridges in the planting of churches. This principle of church growth has been literally applied in many areas of the world. The basis for it, however, can be applied universally—family unit evangelism. Strong, growing churches are composed of whole families. Therefore, our evangelistic goal should be to evangelize whole households.

Responsive in Attitude, Similar in Culture

Church growth in Acts resulted as the apostles concentrated on responsive peoples.

Since the synagogue communities were most receptive, churches grew around them. “The Jews in the synagogue believed; then the proselytes in the synagogue believed. The proselytes were Gentiles who had become Jews. In every synagogue there were devout persons who hadn’t become Jews, but, who, nevertheless, liked Jewish worship . . . When Paul preached Christ many ‘devout Gentiles’ believed and were baptized. That was the Antioch pattern . . . In the synagogues he found those Gentiles who were already inclined to the Gospel.”[1] These “devout Gentiles” were the bridges God used to reach much of the Gentile world.

Certain elements of any society are more receptive to the Gospel than others. A biblical strategy will seek to discover these responsive peoples and concentrate upon them (Acts 13:51).

Growth in the early church was also the result of indigenous churches which were native to the culture. Jewish churches maintained much of their culture, distinct from many of the Gentile churches which were encouraged not to be concerned about becoming Jewish communities (Acts 15). In this manner, Jewish Christians were able to effectively communicate to their own homogeneous group (kind of people). This was also true of each Gentile group. Certainly one could distinguish various cultural features which were particular to the Antioch, Corinthian or Roman churches.

A growing church is often composed of one primary homogeneous group. People tend to prefer to become Christians without crossing barriers of race, language or class. A church for each social or cultural unit will attract others of a similar social unit, enabling it to reach its own kind more effectively.

Widespread Involvement, Evangelistic Focus and Strategy

Church growth continued due to an involved laity. The persecution of the Jerusalem church produced a “scattered” people who “went everywhere preaching the Word.” (Acts 8:4) These persecuted laymen went as far as Antioch, and through their witness a church was planted (11:19-26). Paul encouraged the pattern of lay involvement when he admonished Timothy to “commit the Word to faithful men” so that they would be enabled to teach others also (2 Tim. 2:2). Wherever the church grew, and grows today, the laity has been involved in the recognition and exercise of spiritual gifts.

There are two basic kinds of lay leaders within a church. There are those involved in supportive ministries­­—Sunday school teachers, deacons, trustees, and others. Their primary ministry is towards Christians. The second type of lay leader, who could also be serving in the previous capacity, ministers outside the church building seeking to reach unbelievers. Churches grow in proportion to the number of laymen in the second category.

Church growth was also advanced by the apostles’ concern for lost souls and keeping evangelism as their goal (1 Cor. 9:19-23). This type of evangelism involved not only the proclamation of the message, but also the persuasion of sinners to receive Christ (Acts 18:4, 13; 19:26; 26:28; 28:23.). Those who received the Gospel were then incorporated into local churches as seen from Acts 2:41. Without the emphasis upon proclamation, persuasion and incorporation, neither church planting nor church growth would have resulted.

The apostle Paul wrote that he did not run “aimlessly.” (1 Cor. 9:26) Church growth seldom results without a goal-oriented strategy. The goal of every local church must be growth and multiplication if it is to be biblical!

Conclusion

Is apostolic methodology valid for today? Are its practices reproducible in the world-wide missionary task of our age, including here in America? Principles, yes, but practices are not necessarily a biblical pattern to follow. The methodology may vary from culture to culture, so that a different strategy may have to be developed for the same principle. With that approach in mind, the book of Acts can be used as a handbook of missionary or evangelistic principles from which the strategist must pragmatically develop practices and strategies for planting New Testament churches—churches which are growing, reproducing organisms!


[1] Donald A. McGavran with Win C. Arn, How to Grow a Church (Ventura, CA: Regal Books, 1973), 31.

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on Missionary Strategy and the American Church

How Much Education Do I Need to Be A Missionary?

By Karen Pease, Director of Admissions, Corban University School of Ministry

As a seminary admissions director working with prospective students, I am often asked, “How much education do I need to be a missionary?” This question usually comes from individuals who have just completed 17 rigorous years of education. They are anxious to get out into the real world and do something meaningful.

I can relate to that feeling. I had the same yen for adventure when I was an Intercultural Studies student at Corban University. I was compelled to reach people for Christ. I had a sense of urgency to preach the gospel and make disciples immediately… before it was too late, before the door of opportunity closed.

Often in our zeal to reach others with the Gospel, we assume that further training will only slow us down from the real work of practical ministry, so we forge ahead and board the plane with our Bibles and our good intentions. Maybe we have never even considered further education, believing that our church background or personal experience has adequately prepared us. We think that if we already know the truth, having responded to the Gospel ourselves, then the only work left to do is preach it to others.

If a missionary’s job description was limited to sharing the facts about how Jesus died to save sinners, most Christians could survive on what they already know. But when we look at the Scripture commonly known as the Great Commission, Matthew 28:18-20, the goal is not just to preach the gospel and baptize converts, but to make disciples and teach them to obey all that Christ commanded. It involves the task of training others to better understand God and his Word, and to live in obedience to His truth.

For example, Corban School of Ministry graduates Caxton and Liz Mburu are returning to their home country of Kenya this year to train pastors and other Christian leaders in a place where Christianity has been referred to as being a mile wide, but an inch deep. They want to provide foundational biblical resources to those who still have many questions about Christianity. There are many reports of syncretistic beliefs, such as attending church on Sunday, but visiting the witch doctor during the week.

A Broader Scope

Ministering in this broader scope for the long term can seem like a daunting task. After all, it is impossible to know the answers to every question we will face in ministry. But new social and cultural contexts demand new biblical answers and new theological constructs. Although the truth never changes, the questions cultures ask of the truth will be different over time. How will we answer the hard questions like, “How should a believer in China live under Communism?” or “If a tribal leader in Africa with four wives is saved, must he give up three wives to serve as an elder in the church?” or “Can a Japanese believer display a picture of his deceased loved one in a culture that practices ancestor worship?”

In order to attend to the whole person and make disciples, not just converts, we must ask a bigger question than “How much education do I need to be a missionary?”- a question that can often be rephrased, “How little education can I get by with in order to get to the mission field now?” If we are to accomplish what Christ commanded, our question needs to be, “How can I most effectively prepare for the life-altering task of training people to become obedient Christ followers?”

The answer is twofold. First, we must be equipped to do an exacting job of interpreting biblical texts and discerning the transcultural, timeless principles to be found there. Second, we must explore the meaning and significance of cultural practices in order to find ways to best express those timeless principles. When we have developed skills in those two areas, we must train local Christians to address the questions their culture is asking, and to multiply themselves by raising up future leaders.

Exploring the Significance of the Culture

Does that mean we cannot go to the mission field until we have doctorates in theology and missiology? Not necessarily. But we should always be asking, “How can I be as fully equipped and prepared as possible?” That question requires a posture of humility and a desire to be a person of excellence, always giving our best in whatever God has given us to do.

I faced this question after graduating from high school. Earnestly believing that God was calling me to the mission field, I knew I needed to be equipped. I also knew that would involve more than the great Bible education I had received in church and more than the cross-cultural skills I had developed growing up in the San Francisco Bay Area. Despite my lack of college funding and a physical set back from a near-fatal collision on my first visit to the school, God miraculously provided for me to study at Corban University (then Western Baptist College). There I developed a greater proficiency in the Word of God, and gained a better understanding of how to learn another language, complements of my wisely seasoned missions professor, Dr. Bob Wright.

In addition to language-learning skills, Dr. Wright also taught me that effective cross-cultural communication required more than just knowing another language. It required understanding another person’s culture and worldview in order to avoid misunderstandings. Like the Lebanese woman who, after eight lonely years in America, discovered that we use direct communication instead of the indirect communication that is considered polite in Lebanon. Having declined multiple offers of hospitality and friendship without even realizing it, she said, “When people in the office would ask me if I wanted to go to lunch, I would say ‘no’ to be polite, fully expecting them to ask me again. When they didn’t and left without me, I thought they didn’t really want me along and had asked only out of politeness. In my culture, it would have been too forward to say ‘yes’ the first time.”[1]

I experienced something similar with Asian friends who would never accept my offers of food or drink. After learning that they were merely being polite and would only answer yes when the item was offered the third time, I realized I was not effectively communicating. I began asking a follow up question: “Is that an American ‘no’ or an Asian ‘no’?” It became a humorous way for my friends to retain their cultural courtesy while allowing me to discover if they really wanted something.

For Bible translators, this understanding of direct and indirect communication is even more profound. If a national is culture-bound not to directly point out mistakes, an unsuspecting missionary can wrongly assume that his translation has been verified as accurate, even when it is not correct.

More Social Dynamics

Direct and indirect communication is only one aspect of culture that a skilled missionary needs to understand. He also needs to know about individualism versus group orientation. In Africa, for example, some missionaries who do not comprehend this distinction believe they have led whole congregations to the Lord in a single service because everyone responds to the altar call. What they do not realize is that in a group-oriented culture, everyone will respond in order to keep the missionary from feeling the shame of no one responding.

In addition, missionaries need to recognize whether a culture is relationship- or task-oriented, inclusive or private, formal or informal. Our understanding of these aspects will impact our ability to gracefully maneuver through other cultural conventions related to gender roles, time, organization, and hospitality, just to name a few.

My education at Corban prepared me well for addressing many of these issues in the country where I served. In fact, when I graduated from college, I assumed that any additional skills I needed would be gained through practical experience. In some measure, that was true. Teaching English in Asia gave me daily opportunities to increase my language skills and discover cultural nuances through the power of observation. I learned to slurp my soup to politely show my host how much I enjoyed it, to leave food on my plate in order to show that my host had provided enough for me to eat, to never take the seat of honor next to the person facing the door of the banquet room, and to expect that the right to privacy and personal space was a thing of the past. I even learned how to use idiomatic expressions and was sometimes mistaken for a local when talking with someone on the phone.

Yes, practical experience was a great teacher. But the longer I lived in Asia, and the more people began asking me deeper spiritual questions, the more I realized that further training could help me effectively fulfill my calling to make disciples. I needed more than just the ability to understand their culture, speak their language, and answer their immediate questions about faith. I needed to be able to equip them to study the Bible for themselves, so they would not have to rely on me for proper interpretation of Scripture and relevant application of biblical truth. But the decision to return to the States for more training was laced with apprehension. As far as I knew, I was the only Christian most of my friends knew. Who would they talk to about matters of faith while I was gone? Wouldn’t it be better for me, even with my limited abilities, to just stay put and minister as long as I could?

God answered those questions by reminding me that He was the one who led me to Asia in the first place, and He would certainly carry on His work there with or without me. Thus began the next step of my missionary journey.

Exploring the Meaning and Significance of Scripture

When I first attended Corban School of Ministry (formerly Northwest Baptist Seminary), I was like a sponge – ready to take copious notes and learn profound truths that would help me answer all the difficult questions of life. What I did not realize was that in the process, I had to “unlearn” some of the incorrect thinking I had picked up along the way. In my first year Hermeneutics and Exegesis class, Dr. Jack Willsey helped me strip away my own cultural bias to view Scripture from the perspective of the original author and culture. Much like undergraduate education taught me the process of evaluating and understanding culture in missionary endeavors, seminary strengthened my ability to evaluate and understand the language, culture, history and occasion of scriptural texts, in order to be an effective Bible student and teacher. I also gained a new appreciation for the difficulty in interpreting Scripture, and became less hasty to assume my infallibility.

Seminary helped fortify my spiritual foundation, building upon solid biblical truth rather than my own cultural perceptions. It also further equipped me to aid others in understanding Scripture, so they can wrestle with the questions their culture is asking and make wise biblical applications. This is a vital aspect of fulfilling the commission—to go and make disciples, teaching them to obey all that Christ commanded.

Next Steps

So what is the next step? It is easy when standing on the threshold of a call to cross-cultural ministry to feel paralyzed by the inability to filter seemingly endless possibilities into one specific job description. Thankfully, God does not expect His finite creatures to be infinite in their knowledge, only to be faithful in obeying what we already know to be true from His Word. I truly believe that God cares more about the geography of our hearts (our relationship with him) than about the geography of where we serve in the world. He can easily use yielded vessels for His honor, in countless ways.

It may mean going on a short-term mission trip to discover where your gifts and skills can best be used. Maybe you will volunteer in a local church or community outreach ministry, or conduct informational interviews with people in ministry. Perhaps there is a next step in education, whether through a local Perspectives class, or a more formal college, seminary or missions agency setting. Whatever the case, although it is impossible to learn specific answers to all the questions involved in ministry, it is possible to develop skills, insight, cultural sensitivity, practical wisdom and personal godliness in order to tangibly live out a Christian worldview in any location. May we all continue to humbly ask God to show us how we can be as fully equipped and prepared as possible, for what He has called us to do.


[1]Sarah A. Lanier, Foreign to Familiar: A Guide to Understanding Hot- and Cold-Climate Cultures (Hagerstown, MD: McDougal Publishing, 2000), 10.

Copyright © 2012 Corban University School of Ministry. Originally published in Corban’s e-journal, Dedicated. As long as you include this copyright credit line (and hyperlinks), you may reprint this article in its entirety.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Comments Off on How Much Education Do I Need to Be A Missionary?

What is the Mission of the Church?

Kevin DeYoung and Greg Gilbert, Crossway Publishers, 2011

Reviewed by Lee Ann Zanon, DEDICATED editor and adjunct ministry professor

A quick amazon.com search for missional church—the current hot topic related to how the church should function—generates more than 900 results. In the midst of this vast sea of discussion, What is the Mission of the Church? offers a biblically based compass to navigate the issue.

Authors Kevin DeYoung and Greg Gilbert explain, “We are pastors, writing for the ‘average’ Christian and the ‘ordinary’ pastor … our sense is that this whole issue of mission is the most confusing, most discussed, most energizing and most potentially divisive issue in the evangelical church today.”

While the authors are conversational rather than confrontational in tone, their convictions and conclusions are distinct. They state their position early, “We believe the church is sent into the world to witness to Jesus by proclaiming the gospel and making disciples of all nations. This is our task. This is our unique and central calling.”

In recent years, the mission of the church has been expanded in some cases to include environmental stewardship, community renewal, helping the homeless, and more. DeYoung and Gilbert assert this definition is too broad. “Even in the world around us, everyone understands that a mission is the primary thing you set out to accomplish. Most every organization has something, as opposed to other things, that it does and must do … its mission. We think the same is true of the church.”

The authors acknowledge and encourage Christians’ good works, yet do not name them as the primary purpose of the church. Rather, they assert that evangelism and discipleship must be given top priority.

The book dedicates considerable space to exploring and defining the complex realms of mission, gospel, kingdom, and social justice. Substantial Bible references and explanations are included for each, presented in understandable terms.

In determining the mission of the church, the authors state that it cannot be an umbrella covering all actions taken in obedience to Christ. Rather it is a specific task, as established in the Great Commission. This section of the book includes insights from theologians including John Stott, Andreas Kostenberger, Darrell Bock, and others.

For “Understanding the Gospel,” the realm of photography is used to illustrate differing perspectives. A “zoom-lens” person views the gospel as simply the “message a person must believe in order to be saved.” A “wide-angle” person sees it as “the whole good news of Christianity … not just forgiveness, but also God’s purpose to re-make the world.”

Related to believers’ role in establishing the kingdom of God, the book emphasizes the church’s need to tell people about the King (Jesus), realizing that He alone can and will establish His kingdom. The authors counter the idea that “extending the kingdom” involves planting trees, feeding the homeless, or renovating run-down apartments. They explain the kingdom as relational and dynamic, rather than geographic. They observe, “Good deeds are good, but they don’t broaden the borders of the kingdom. The only way the kingdom of God—the redemptive rule of God—is extended is when He brings another sinner to renounce sin and self-righteousness and bow His knee to King Jesus.”

In the realm of social justice, the authors present seven principles for making sense of it. In principle five, they use the idea of “moral proximity” related to responsibility. They note that we are all responsible to help someone, but we are not obligated to help everyone. They state, “The closer the need, the greater the moral obligation to help.” They go on to say, “Moral proximity should not make us more cavalier to the poor. But it should free us from unnecessary guilt and make us more caring toward those who count on us most.”

Love rather than obligation/guilt as the basis for social justice is key. It is a person’s gratitude for salvation, and comprehension of what God has done for him or her, that is the biblical motive for service. The authors observe, “The problem is that social justice has too often been sold with condemnation by implication and the heavy hand of ought. It seems much better to simply encourage churches and individual Christians to love.”

The depth of biblical study and research used to support the authors’ viewpoint is significant, and their writing is refreshingly free of angry language or innuendo. They invite readers to seriously consider their findings, yet there is no sense of condemnation toward anyone who has a different opinion. DeYoung and Gilbert are confident of their conclusions, and don’t convey a need to prove them at others’ expense.

The epilogue, a fictional conversation between a young pastor and an experienced ministry leader, incorporates the book’s overall themes and offers readers a different way to process them. It touches upon commonly disputed elements regarding purpose and strategy, presented in a framework of mutual respect and consideration. As we individually and collectively move forward in implementing God’s design for His church, we would do well to heed this example.

Copyright © 2012 Corban University School of Ministry. Originally published in Corban’s e-journal, Dedicated. As long as you include this copyright credit line (and hyperlinks), you may reprint this article in its entirety.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , | Comments Off on What is the Mission of the Church?

The Shooting Salvationist

By David Stokes, Steerforth Press, 2011

Reviewed by Dr. Kent Kersey, Associate Professor of Ministries

One of my church history professors described fundamentalism as “no fun, too much damn, and no mental.” Such a description surely highlights the attitude of the “fighting fundies,” but ignores the theology behind the movement. In fact, there are two sides to the fundamentalist ideal: attitude and theology. The Shooting Salvationist: J. Frank Norris and the Murder Trial that Captivated America by David Stokes brilliantly highlights the ugliness of the attitude, but its historical agenda doesn’t allow for a treatment of its theology.

Stokes, a pastor of a large non-denominational church in Virginia, supplies a riveting, well written account of one of the most colorful fundamentalists ever. By the middle of 1924, “J. Frank Norris had the largest Protestant church in America, a newspaper that went into more than fifty thousand homes, and a radio station and network that could potentially take his voice to millions.” This Fort Worth Texas pastor carried a big stick, but he definitely didn’t speak softly.

The headline of Norris’s story is that on a Saturday afternoon in July 1926, an unarmed, wealthy lumberman named D. E. Chipps visited the church office. Chipps warned Norris to back off from publically criticizing and humiliating Chipps’ friend and business partner, H. C. Meacham. Norris, who felt threatened by Chipps, reached into his desk drawer, pulled out a pistol, and shot Chipps dead. A large part of the book details the subsequent trial. Spoiler Alert: Norris is found not guilty, based on a self-defense argument.

While the shooting and the subsequent trial are the stars of this book, the supporting material—Norris’s megalomania and the cultural details—almost shine brighter. By all accounts, he was just plain mean. He called the city manager “the missing link.” He lamented great Roman Catholic conspiracies that would turn Forth Worth into a haven for bootleggers and Romanists.

One contemporary journalist described Norris’s influence this way, “The plain fact is that the people of Fort Worth are afraid of Frank Norris. From newspapermen to merchants and bankers he has them bluffed. They are afraid of him in precisely the same way in which one is afraid of an insane man or one who is violently drunk. There are no tactics they feel, to which he will not stoop, nothing too low or vile, true or untrue, that he will not say about his enemies.”

Despite these realities, the public still embraced Norris as a charismatic leader and dynamic public speaker. He was a driving force in fundamentalism, and his fame and communication skills helped grow his church to the extent noted above.

It’s important to remember that Norris shot Chipps only one year after the Scopes trial, the most definitive face-off between modernism and fundamentalism ever. Scopes had been a technical victory for the fundamentalists. In the court of public opinion, however, the fundamentalists lost. William Jennings Bryan publicly fought against evolution and for biblical literalism. Fundamentalists saw him as a prophet; modernists saw him as a quaint, out-of-touch politician. When Bryan died shortly after the Scopes trial, many believed Norris would be the new leader. In fact in Norris’s office, “[a] picture of William Jennings Bryan hung on the wall directly above him.”

The Ku Klux Klan and Prohibition also loom largely in the background. Although Norris was not an official member of the KKK, he frequently spoke at their meetings. The highest ranking Klansman in Fort Worth was an influential leader in Norris’s church. It’s also important to remember that Prohibition had been official law for six years when the shooting took place. One of the defense’s strongest points of strategy was to show how Norris’s victim was frequently under the influence of the evil whiskey. This was not only a slur on his character; it was a charge of blatant lawlessness.

The Shooting Salvationist is a valuable contribution to the history of the American religious culture of the early twenties by revealing the darker side of fundamentalism. It accurately shows how people like Norris embodied a belligerent parasitic attitude that attached itself to a reasoned theological reaction to an unorthodox version of Christianity, one which deprived man of his imago Dei and denied the absolute authority of Scripture. His story clearly reflects how the negative social/reactionary aspects of fundamentalism tend to overshadow its positive theological elements, including confirmation of non-Darwinian humanity (man is the image of God) and affirmation of Scripture (inerrancy).

For Christians today, the book offers a valuable warning as we consider our approach to impacting contemporary culture. The outcome of Norris’s view—culture as a force to fight against rather than a mission field with which to interact—speaks for itself.

Copyright © 2012 Corban University School of Ministry. Originally published in Corban’s e-journal, Dedicated. As long as you include this copyright credit line (and hyperlinks), you may reprint this article in its entirety.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , | Comments Off on The Shooting Salvationist

Fresh Eyes

By Dr. Greg Trull, Dean of Ministries, Professor of Biblical Studies

It seemed like a great idea. Looking for ways to enrich our church’s worship and witness, we introduced a unique opportunity for participation. Like in Old Testament times, we invited people to offer thanks as they gave their offerings. We set aside part of the service when they could come to the front, place their contribution in the plate, and tell how God had blessed them. Wonderful.

As the youth pastor, I sat in the back among a group of neighborhood kids. Hoping the earnest sharing of those up front would spark an interest in Christ, I whispered, “This looks kinda cool, what do you think they’re doing?” One student quickly replied, “Can’t you see, Greg? Those people are paying God for doing stuff for them!”

In that moment, it was as if the reverent music of the morning screeched to a halt like a needle dragging across an old vinyl record. I had not seen it that way. But, now I could agree that it did look a lot like down payments for divine favor.

In the 25 years since that experience, I have found myself in many situations where I needed fresh eyes to see. Whether it was someone else observing my ministry at the church, or taking a long look at a painting in our home, I have required help to see what familiarity had obscured.

This issue of Dedicated seeks to encourage you with a fresh look at key areas in ministry. Russ Glessner demonstrates that too many Evangelicals give the resurrection merely a passing glance in their thought and work. He challenges us to focus on it like the Scripture does, as the center of our faith and hope. I offer a guide for finding relevant applications from Old Testament narratives, without abandoning faithful interpretation.

Our book reviewers also point us toward fresh viewpoints. Jack Willsey urges us to reconsider the call Dolphus Weary makes in I Ain’t Coming Back. Karen Pease critiques Jim and Casper Go to Church, set to release in paperback this year. It records the observations of a believer and an atheist as they visit Evangelical churches. Paul Johnson reviews Radical: Taking Back Your Faith from the American Dream, a plea for a break from cultural Christianity and a recommitment to biblical discipleship.

And in case you’re wondering about the photo at the top of the page, it highlights a great opportunity for the Corban School of Ministry. We are building a partnership with International Training and Equipping Ministries to train pastors in West Africa. Stay tuned to hear more as this exciting door opens.

As our new year begins, we pray the Lord blesses you with clear sight and renewed vision!

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , | 1 Comment

Resurrection Re-Focus

By Russ Glessner, Professor of New Testament

The lack of focus given to the resurrection of Jesus Christ in theological thinking and teaching today is troubling. Surprisingly, many evangelicals seem to undervalue it. It’s not that they do not believe it to be important, nor do they disbelieve its historical authenticity. Yet anecdotal evidence and a perusal of theological works reveal a substantial lack of passion for the importance of Christ’s resurrection.

A brief overview of Scripture–as reflected in Jesus’ teaching, verbal portraits of the evangelists, and the early church in Acts and the epistles–provides strong emphasis on the value and significance of Christ’s resurrection. Therefore, it should be a major part of our thinking, proclamation, and theological framework. It is integral to our faith. As noted by author N.T. Wright,

“To put it at its most basic: the resurrection of Jesus offers itself . . . not as an odd event within the world as it is but as the utterly characteristic, prototypical, and foundational event within the world as it has begun to be. It is not an absurd event within the old world but the symbol and starting point of the new world. The claim advanced in Christianity is of that magnitude: Jesus of Nazareth ushers in not simply a new religious possibility, not simply a new ethic or a new way of salvation, but a new creation …We could cope—the world could cope—with a Jesus who ultimately remains a wonderful idea inside his disciples’ minds and hearts. The world cannot cope with a Jesus who comes out of the tomb, who inaugurates God’s new creation right in the middle of the old one.” [1]

The “Whole Loaf”

I can clearly recall the day many years ago when a guest speaker at our small church in Dallas, Texas, used a vivid illustration to explain that the Gospel includes the truth that Jesus died for our sins and that He was raised to life on the third day. He boldly declared, “When you refer to the Gospel, you need to offer people a whole loaf, not just a half a loaf! It includes His resurrection as provision for our salvation.”

More recently, while visiting what seemed to be a good, thriving church, I listened in vain for any reference to Jesus’ resurrection as the pastor referred to the Gospel. Tracts, evangelistic challenges, prayers, sermons, songs, and theological discussions also often fail to mention the resurrection. This lack makes me deeply appreciate the bold lyrics of a classic hymn, Hallelujah, What a Savior! by Philip P. Bliss, “Lifted up was He to die, ‘It is finished,’ was His cry; Now in heav’n exalted high: Hallelujah! What a Savior!”

Theological Neglect

A brief perusal of theological literature, especially basic texts, evidences an amazing dearth of thought and reflection concerning Jesus’ resurrection. Books and articles offer extensive discussion on the significance of the death of Christ, but there is often little or no reflection on the value of the resurrection.

Richard Gaffin, Jr., has shown that leading theologians such as Charles Hodge, William Shedd, Abraham Kuyper, Louis Berkhof, and John Murray virtually ignored the resurrection’s significance in their discussions of Christ’s salvific work, even though they had a great deal to say concerning His death.[2] In other writings, author Robert Reymond devotes 173 pages to various aspects of the “cross work of Christ,” but none to the theological significance of Jesus’ resurrection.[3] In Lewis Sperry Chafer and John Walvoord’s Major Bible Themes, there is less than a page about the significance of the resurrection. Henry Thiessen’s Lectures in Systematic Theology has about three.

In Millard Erickson’s deservedly popular Christian Theology, one page out of 1,274 is devoted to the theological import of the resurrection of Christ. Works by Robert Lightner, with one page out of 282, and Charles Ryrie, two pages out of 522, provide further illustration. A. H. Strong’s Systematic Theology carefully discusses Christ’s atonement for 60 pages, but does not explore the significance of His resurrection. Of the 2,607 pages in Lewis Sperry Chafer’s seven volume set on Systematic Theology, 175 deal with the death of Christ, but only seven address His resurrection.

In his unabridged theology, Wayne Grudem spends 39 pages discussing the atonement, but devotes only 16 to the resurrection and ascension, with three devoted to the doctrinal significance of the resurrection. James Leo Garrett Jr. devotes 78 pages to the cross and its significance, with 34 on “The Resurrection of Jesus” and three relating to its consequences.[4] In Norman Geisler’s four volume set Systematic Theology, “Christology” is strangely found as Appendix One (Vol. 2:597-631) with no discussion on the significance of Christ’s resurrection.

What may we fairly conclude? In many of the theological works we access there is a scarcity of thoughtful, impactful reflection on Jesus’ resurrection. A robust theology of the nature of God’s saving work in Jesus Christ is greatly diminished by this lack, which points to a “resurrection-less” proclamation of the Gospel. Gerald O’Collins offers a pointed summary,

“Generally speaking, both Catholic and Protestant theologians have proved loyal successors to St. Anselm ([A.D.] 1033/4-1109) who managed to discuss the redemption in his Cur Deus Homo? while completely ignoring Christ’s resurrection. So long as full credit for our redemption is ascribed to Christ’s death, his resurrection becomes at best a highly useful (if not strictly necessary) proof of Christian claims. Looking back on such Western theology, we might parody Paul and cry out: ‘Resurrection is swallowed up in crucifixion. O Resurrection, where is thy victory? O Resurrection, where is thy sting?’ ” [5]

A More Encouraging Perspective

However, there is encouragement to be found if we look for it.[6] The Apostles’ Creed affirms belief in Jesus Christ who was “crucified, dead and buried. . . . [O]n the third day rose again from the dead.” It is heartening to view the “whole loaf” in this early creed. The Orthodox Church is known for its emphasis on the resurrection of Christ. Bishop Kallistos Ware writes,

“The Crucifixion is itself a victory; but on Great Friday the victory is hidden, whereas on Easter morning it is made manifest. Christ rises from the dead, and by rising he delivers us from anxiety and terror: the victory of the Cross is confirmed love is openly shown to be stronger than hatred, and life to be stronger than death.”[7]

How important is the resurrection to our understanding of the Gospel, salvation, the Christian life, and theology? The New Testament is clear. Jesus’ own teaching about His resurrection, the portraits of Jesus’ resurrection in the four Gospels, the proclamation of the early church, and the teaching in the epistles (especially Paul’s) is starkly emphatic. A. M. Ramsey notes,

“So it is that the centre of Apostolic Christianity is Crucifixion-Resurrection; not Crucifixion alone nor Resurrection alone, nor even Crucifixion as the prelude and Resurrection as the finale but the blending of the two in a way that is as real to the Gospel as it is defiant to the world. The theme is implicit in the mission of Jesus as the Servant of the Lord, and it becomes increasingly explicit until John says the final word. To say that this theme is the centre of the Gospel is not to belittle the life and words of Jesus that preceded it nor the work of the Paraclete that follows it. For Life-through-Death is the principle of Jesus’ whole life; it is the inward essence of the life of the Christian; and it is the unveiling of the glory of the eternal God.”[8]

Christ’s Declaration

Each of the four Gospels makes the resurrection a significant part of its story.[9] Jesus explicitly referred to His resurrection on at least nine occasions.[10] His statements include: “From that time on Jesus began to explain to His disciples that He must go to Jerusalem and suffer many things at the hands of the elders, chief priests, and teachers of the law, and that He must be killed, and on the third day be raised to life.” (Matt. 16:21) Also, “… the Son of Man will be betrayed to the chief priests and teachers of the law. They will condemn Him to death and will turn Him over to the Gentiles to be mocked and flogged and crucified. On the third day He will raised to life.”(Matt. 20:18-19)

The disciples did not seem to grasp that their Lord truly would be crucified and rise again. However, His enemies apparently understood His words, and were concerned about hiding what might appear to be a resurrection (Matt. 28:12-15).

The Early Church

The book of Acts refers to Christ’s resurrection 24 times, and it is a major plank in the apostolic kērugma (proclamation) of the early church. Three of those statements are implicit (e.g. 23:6 “hope and resurrection of the dead.”) Several major speeches focus on the fact and significance of Jesus’ resurrection, including Peter’s Pentecostal sermon (Acts 2), his message in Cornelius’ house (Acts 10), Paul’s synagogue message in Pisidian Antioch (Acts 13), and his speaking with the Athenians at the Areopagus (Acts 17).

Paul’s proclamation of the Gospel in the Thessalonian synagogue (Acts 17), his speaking before the council/Sanhedrin (Acts 23), and his messages to Felix, Festus, and Agrippa (Acts 24, 25, 26) provide additional reference to the resurrection.[11] The powerful, swift, effective spread of the Gospel from Jerusalem to the end of the earth (“Rome” in Acts) was due to the Holy Spirit’s blessing of the proclamation of the entire Gospel, the “whole loaf,” as I mentioned previously.

Apostolic Writings

The epistles–especially Paul’s–affirm not only the fact of the resurrection, but also its importance to the salvation narrative. The Gospel comprises not only Christ’s death for our sins, but also His resurrection. This emphasis in Paul’s writing has been observed and studied by several scholars, including David Michael Stanley in Christ’s Resurrection in Pauline Soteriology.[12] Here is a sampling of important references, arranged to highlight the point I am making.[13]

“[If] we believe that Jesus died and rose again … “ (1 Thess. 4:14)

“Paul, an apostle—sent not from men nor by man, but by Jesus Christ and God the Father who raised Him from the dead.” (Gal. 1:1)

“For I passed on to you . . . that Christ died for our sins according to theScriptures, that He was buried, that He was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, and that He appeared to Peter, and then to the Twelve.” (1 Cor. 15:3-5)

“He was crucified in weakness, yet He lives by God’s power.” (2 Cor. 13:4)

“…God will credit righteousness for us who believe in Him who raised Jesus our Lord from the dead. He was delivered over to death for our sins and was raised to life for our justification.” (Rom. 4:24-25)

“We were therefore buried with Him through baptism into death in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, we too may live a new life.” (Rom. 6:4)

“Who is he that condemns? Christ Jesus who died—more than that, who was raised to life– is at the right hand of God and is also interceding for us.” (Rom. 8:34)

“If you confess with your mouth, ‘Jesus is Lord,’ and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved.” (Rom. 10:9)

“Having been buried with Him in baptism, and raised with Him through your faith in the power of God, who raised Him from the dead.” (Col. 2:12)

“Since you died with Christ to the basic principles of this world . . . Since, then you have been raised with Christ …” (Col. 2:20; 3:1)

“Remember Jesus Christ, raised from the dead, descended from David. This is my gospel.” (2 Tim. 2:8)

“May the God of peace who … brought back from the dead our Lord Jesus …” (Heb. 13:20)

“ … In His great mercy He has given us new birth into a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead.” (1 Pet. 1:3)

“ … I am the First and the Last. I am the Living One; I was dead, and behold I am alive for ever and ever! And I hold the keys of death and Hades.”

These texts offer a powerful case for the value and importance of the resurrection. We would do well to re-focus, and begin redressing the imbalance in our thinking and teaching concerning the Gospel.

Conclusion

Is the resurrection of Jesus important enough to engage our thinking as we read, study, and meditate upon the Scripture? Will we reflect upon its significance and then teach, preach, and herald it as integral to the Gospel? I hope so. As hymn writer J. Wilbur Chapman expresses so profoundly in One Day,

“Living He loved me; Dying He saved me; Buried He carried my sins far away;

Rising He justified freely forever; One day He’s coming—O, glorious day!”

 

Copyright © 2012 Corban University School of Ministry. Originally published in Corban’s e-journal, Dedicated. As long as you include this copyright credit line (and hyperlinks), you may reprint this article in its entirety.


[1] N[icholas] T[homas] Wright, Surprised by Hope: Rethinking Heaven, the Resurrection, and the Mission of theChurch (New York: Harper Collins, 2008), 67, 68.

[2] Richard B. Gaffin, Jr., Resurrection and Redemption: A Study in Paul’s Soteriology. 2nd ed. (Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian & Reformed,1987; reprint, The Centrality of the Resurrection [Grand Rapids: Baker, 1978]), 12.

[3] Robert Reymond, A New Systematic Theology of the Christian Faith (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1998).

[4] James Leo Garrett Jr., Systematic Theology: Biblical, Historical, and Evangelical, vol. 2 (North Richland Hills, TX: BIBAL Press, 2001).

[5] Gerald O’Collins, The Resurrection of Jesus Christ (Valley Forge: Judson Press, 1973): 118.

[6] Myron Houghton [Faith Baptist Theological Seminary of Ankeny, IA] refers several times to the Gospel as comprising both the death and resurrection of our Lord in “Distinguishing Law, Gospel, and Grace,” Faith Pulpit (Jul-Sep 2011), 1-5.

[7] Bishop Kallistos Ware, The Orthodox Way, new rev. ed. (Crestwood, NJ: St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press,1995), 83.

[8] A[rthur] M[ichael] Ramsey, The Resurrection of Christ, rev. ed. (London: Collins Fontana Books, 1961), 20-21.

[9] This leaves aside the major issue of the textual-critical question of Mark 16.9-20.

[10] John 2.19; Matt 12.39-40; Matt 16.21 (= Mark 8.31-32; Luke 9.21-22); Matt 17.9 (= Mark 9.9-10); Matt 17.22-23 (= Mark 9.31-31); John 10.17-18; Matt 20.18-19 (= Mark 10.33-34; Luke 18.32-34); Matt 26.32; John 14-16 (passim)

[11] The list of texts includes Acts 1.3, 22; 2.23-24; 31-32 (2x); 3.15; 4.2, 10, 33; 5.30-32; 10.40, 41; 13.30, 33, 34, 37; 17.2-3, 18, 31; 23.6; 24.21; 25.18-20; 26.8, 22-23.

[12] David Michael Stanley, Christ’s Resurrection in Pauline Soteriology, Analecta Biblica: Investigationes Scientificae in Res Biblicas 13 (Romae: E Pontificio Instituto Biblico, 1961); James D. G. Dunn, The Theology of Paul the Apostle (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans, 1998, pp. 234-65 [Ch. 10 “The Risen Lord”]; Paul Beasley-Murray, TheMessage of the Resurrection,The Bible Speaks Today (Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1984), 162 [Ch. 5 “The Witness of Paul to the Resurrection”]; Herman Ridderbos, Paul: An Outline of His Theology, Trans. by John Richard De Witt (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans, 1998), pp. 206-214 [Sect. 37 “Death and Resurrection with Christ”]; Geerhardus Vos, The Pauline Eschatology (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans, 1961 [1930], pp. 136-71.

[13] An additional sampling of passages which portray a unified whole of the death and resurrection of Jesus include Gal 2.19-20; 1 Cor. 6.14; 2 Cor. 4.10-12, 13-14; 5.15; Rom 1.4; 5.10; 6.4-11; 7.4; 8.11,; Eph 1.20-21; 2.1-6; Phil 3.10-11; Col 2.11-15; 1 Thess. 1.10; Heb 7.23-25; 11.17-19; 1 Pet 1.21; 3.18, 21; and Rev 5.6.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | 7 Comments